Results 41 to 50 of 265
-
10-01-2013, 08:37 AM #41
That was also before Obama changed mandates and other framework to Obamacare.
There for, it's not even the same bill that Supreme Court ruled on.
Try again.
-
-
10-01-2013, 08:58 AM #42
It's clear that the Constitution provides the Federal Government with the power to require all people to own at least three My Little Ponies and sign up for at least one BRONY club. Because the Commerce Clause.
-
10-01-2013, 09:25 AM #43
Apparently I am getting my info from some pretty decent sites. But since you chose to toss out the childish little teabagger insult again I feel I should tell you that I am not a member of the Tea Party.
With that said, hopefully you guys can find a website that explains the difference between something being ruled Constitutional by the Supreme Court (not in violation of your Constitutional rights) and something being Constitutional law (actually written in the Constitution). Maybe then you can quit wasting so much time arguing that you know something you clearly do not.
-
-
10-01-2013, 09:49 AM #44

However, again Daune this law has gone to the Supreme court and ruled Constitutional, or did you miss that day?
as a tax
-
10-01-2013, 10:02 AM #45
This already went through SCOTUS though. What is there to compromise on something that is already law and deemed constitutional by the people who decide that.
Hence, my use of "constitutional law."
Are the Reps arguing semantics too?
-
-
10-01-2013, 10:17 AM #46
Actually the libs are arguing semantics. I simply clarified that it is not Constitutional law, although I just said Constitutional because I assumed others would read that you said Constitutional law and grasp the obviousness of my response. My mistake for thinking others would be able to accomplish that. They want to argue that because SCOTUS ruled that it was not un-Constitutional that I am wrong. I am not.Last edited by duane1969; 10-01-2013 at 10:59 AM.
-
10-01-2013, 10:54 AM #47
Here is a link to everything shutting and partially shutting down...
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/...act/index.html
-
-
10-01-2013, 11:21 AM #48
So you're arguing semantics.
"Sure it's not unconstitutional, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's constitutional!" is your argument?
-
10-01-2013, 11:57 AM #49
Ruled Constitutional by SCOTUS means it is not in violation of your Constitutional rights.
Constitutional law means it is part of the document that is the Constitution.
There is a very clear and concise difference here. There is nothing semantic about it. The police using radar guns is Constitutional because it doesn't violate our Constitutional rights, but it isn't Constitutional law.
-
10-01-2013, 12:16 PM #50
Exactly. I explained why I used the term and you're still arguing it. Semantics.
The law is constitutional in the sense it is within the boundaries of the constitution as decided by the Supreme Court.
Can we flipping move on now?
-













